4:16-cv-03444-RBH-SVH Date Filed 10/20/16 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 4

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION

) Civil Action No.:

Alex Lorenzo Robinson, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) COMPLAINT
) 42 U.S. Code, 1983
Officer Kent Donald and the Horry )
County Police Department, )
)
Defendants. )
) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, complaining of the Defendants, would show the Court follows:

1. Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of Horry County, South Carolina.

2. Defendant Kent Donald is or was an employee of Defendant Horry County Police

Department.

3. The Horry County Police Department is an agency of the County of Horry, State of

South Carolina.

4. This Court has personal jurisdiction of the parties and subject-matter jurisdiction in

that 42 U.S. Code 1983 is a Federal law.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Plaintiff incorporates the above allegations of paragraphs 1-4 as if fully set out herein.

5. Plaintiff was arrested and charged with trafficking cocaine in August, 2009. His

arrest was based upon evidence seized during execution of a search warrant.

6. The search warrant was issued by a circuit court judge upon information provided

by Defendant Kent Donald. Donald knowingly and deliberately provided false information to

Page 1 of 4
 4:16-cv-03444-RBH-SVH Date Filed 10/20/16 Entry Number 1 Page 2 of 4

secure said search warrant. As a direct consequence, Plaintiff was arrested and detained.

7. On or about November 9. 2011, Plaintiffs case was tried to a jury. He was convicted

of trafficking cocaine and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

8. Plaintiff appealed his case to the South Carolina Court of Appeals where the

conviction was reversed. Subsequently, the South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed in part the

Court of Appeals. On March 30, 2016 the Supreme court issued its opinion in The State v. Alex

Robinson, 415 S.C. 600 (2016). It was on that date Plaintiff received a favorable termination of the

proceedings against him. March 30, 2016 is the date of accrual of Plaintiffs claims against

Defendants.

9. Plaintiff was finally released in March, 2016, after spending some 5 years in prison.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

MALICIOUS PROSECUTION

The Plaintiff incorporates the above allegations of paragraphs 1-9 as if fully set out herein.

10. Defendants instituted an original proceeding, to wit: a search warrant.

11. The process eventually ended in the Plaintiffs favor when on March 30, 2016, the

South Carolina Supreme Court reversed his conviction.

12. The search warrant was maliciously and intentionally issued upon false information,

for the purpose of securing a criminal conviction of the Plaintiff.

13. As a result of Defendants malicious prosecution, Plaintiff was imprisoned for over

6 years, causing physical, mental and emotional damages.

Page 2 of 4
 4:16-cv-03444-RBH-SVH Date Filed 10/20/16 Entry Number 1 Page 3 of 4

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

ABUSE OF CRIMINAL PROCESS

The Plaintiff incorporates the above allegations of paragraphs 1-13 as if fully set outherein.

14. Defendants application for a search warrant, based upon a false affidavit, was an

unlawful and abusive application of the criminal process, with the ulterior purpose of securing a

criminal conviction of the Plaintiff.

15. The application for the search warrant upon false information was a willful and

intentional abuse of the criminal process, not proper in the regular conduct of such process.

16. At all times pertinent, Defendant Donald was operating under the color of law in his

official capacity.

17. As a direct consequence of the abuse of process, Plaintiff suffered physical, mental

and emotional damages.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF FOURTH AMENDMENT CIVIL RIGHTS
42 U.S. CODE, 1983

The Plaintiff incorporates the above allegations of paragraphs 1-17 as if fully set out

herein.

18. A search was conducted on the Plaintiffs home, pursuant to a search warrant that

was fraudulently obtained by Defendant Donald. The issuing judge based probable cause upon

false information, included in the search warrant affidavit.

19. As a result of Defendant Donalds acts an illegal search and seizure was conducted

on Plaintiffs property, in violation of Plaintiffs rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United

States Constitution.

Page 3 of 4
 4:16-cv-03444-RBH-SVH Date Filed 10/20/16 Entry Number 1 Page 4 of 4

20. Subsequent to the unlawful search and seizure, Plaintiff was arrested and charged

with trafficking cocaine. Plaintiffs arrest was an unlawful seizure growing out of the illegal search

of Plaintiffs residence.

21. Plaintiff was convicted of trafficking cocaine, sentence to 25 years in prison, where

he served a total of 5 years.

22. Plaintiff has been irreparably damaged physically, emotionally and mentally as a

direct result of the violation of his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unlawful seizure.

23. Plaintiff is informed and believes he is entitled to judgment against the Defendants

for compensatory, consequential and punitive damages in an amount to be determined by a jury.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment by this Court as follows:

a. Awarding plaintiff compensatory damages in a full and fair sum determined by a

jury;

b. Awarding Plaintiff punitive damages in an amount to be determined by a jury;

c. Awarding reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to 42 U.S. Code 1988; and

d. Granting such other relief as this Court deems proper.

Law Offices of William Stuart Duncan, PA

s/Raymond C. Fischer
Raymond C. Fischer, Fed ID # 822
William Stuart Duncan, Fed ID #5402
PO Box 736
1001 Front Street
Georgetown, SC 29442
wsdlaw1@aol.com
rfischer@lawyer.com

Attorneys For Plaintiff

Georgetown, South Carolina

October 20, 2016

Page 4 of 4